CommunityJev Tools & CLIs
Jev-Mobile: Jev as an Executor for Mobile GUI Agents (arXiv 2609.30186)
Jev-Mobile moves mobile GUI agents to low-frequency VLM planning and high-frequency lightweight execution: the VLM specifies local goals, the accessibility tree defines a structured action space, and Jev selects actions. On AndroidWorld it reaches 79% task success against 78% for SeeAct-V.
- Format
- Article
- Published by
- Community
- Last verified
- Oct 2026
Highlights
- One VLM decision can cover multiple GUI actions because Jev executes repeatedly inside the action space.
- AndroidWorld: 79% task success, versus 78% for SeeAct-V and 84% for a step-wise VLM baseline.
- Among successful trajectories, mean end-to-end execution time fell 32.7% versus step-wise VLM.
- Mean model API cost dropped 73.4% on successful trajectories relative to the step-wise VLM baseline.
- Separating high-level VLM reasoning from low-level execution preserves adaptive interaction.
Watch out
arXiv preprint posted September 24, 2026 (cs.AI, cs.SE) by Linghua Zhang; no code release is mentioned. The efficiency figures cover successful trajectories on one benchmark suite, AndroidWorld, and the 79% success rate is competitive with, not better than, the 84% step-wise VLM baseline.
Questions about this entry
Short answers drawn from the linked project or page.
Low-frequency VLM planning plus high-frequency lightweight execution. The VLM specifies local goals, the accessibility tree defines a structured, executable action space, and Jev, a fast typed decision model, repeatedly selects actions within that space.
79% task success on the full AndroidWorld task suite, compared with 78% for SeeAct-V and 84% for a step-wise VLM baseline that uses the VLM at nearly every interaction step.
Among successful trajectories, it reduces mean end-to-end execution time by 32.7% and mean model API cost by 73.4% relative to the step-wise VLM baseline, because many GUI actions execute under a single VLM decision.
Most existing systems use the vision-language model for both planning and action grounding at nearly every interaction step, which drives substantial latency and model-serving cost. Jev-Mobile offloads the repeated grounding decisions to a lightweight typed model.
The paper says the design preserves adaptive interaction: the VLM still sets local goals as the situation changes, while Jev re-selects within the current action space between VLM decisions rather than executing a fixed script.
Yes. The structured executable action space comes from the accessibility tree, which is what lets a fast typed decision model choose among discrete candidate actions instead of grounding raw screen content at every step.
The digest names no code release. It is an arXiv preprint from September 24, 2026, the efficiency gains cover successful trajectories only, and the 79% success rate trails the 84% step-wise baseline, so cost wins come with a small accuracy trade.
Reactions & coverage
Posts, threads, and videos about this entry from around the web.
X: Website to App turns any URL into a native app
More Jev resources like this
50GitHub stars
A StarCraft II controller combining fast JEV action selection with persistent GPT-6 planning that defeats the strongest non-cheating built-in AI, Lv7. The combined system wins four full games at Lv5-Lv7 at a mean estimated cost of USD 3.71 per game, with a median JEV response time of 0.422 s.
Jev Tools & CLIsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
sc2musa/Jev_StarPython
sc2musa/Jev_StarPythonA diagnosis-guided repair agent whose CWE classification comes from Jev. Jev beats six open-weight models on every classification and ranking metric and runs at 6.27x lower median latency than GPT-5.6-Sol; with Jev diagnosing, repair lifts the detector-measured security pass rate from 63.5% to 70.7%.
Jev Tools & CLIsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
Jev-Mem is an agentic memory architecture that gives a System-One control plane charge of memory typing, query routing, retrieval budgets, graph traversal, candidate scoring, and adaptive stopping, invoking System Two only for complex reasoning and synthesis. On LoCoMo it scores 0.777.
Jev Tools & CLIsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
JevSpawn, a compositional policy, connects natural-language task specifications to finite probabilistic exploration: parallel action spawning pairs with feedback-driven branch selection, representation revision, and recovery from retained alternatives, with no training. It improves performance on eight benchmarks.
Jev Agents & MCPArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
12GitHub stars
A Pi extension that keeps conversation text verbatim while pruning stale tool history with Jev keep-or-drop decisions, falling back to Pi's built-in summary compaction when pruning cannot free enough context.
Jev Tools & CLIs#community#typescript#compaction
8GitHub stars
A research runtime for bounded decision models: it pages and refines a virtual option space so Jev can choose among far more tools, memories, and context blocks than a single request allows, with explicit approval for side effects.
Jev Agents & MCP#community#python#agents
From the Jev guides
Original write-ups on what this entry is for.
The request shape barely changes across surfaces; the surrounding contract does. When to call the API directly and when a gateway, a Worker binding, or a router entry earns its extra hop.
Jev Tools & CLIs#gateway#vercel#cloudflare
Read article
Taking a decision checkpoint out of Python: what the GGUF and browser WebGPU exports preserve, what they change, and the parity evidence the model cards publish.
Jev Tools & CLIs#open-models#local#onnx
Read article
Jev labels a record that already exists. Code moves, flags, or holds it. How the document, mail, and transfer tools keep the action out of the model.
Jev Tools & CLIs#classification#email#security
Read article
From the Jev community
Posts from builders shipping with Jev right now.